On Wednesday, 20 May 2015 21:07:12 UTC+3, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-05-20, red floyd wrote:
> > On 5/20/2015 7:30 AM, 嘱 Tiib wrote:
> ...
> >> It was response to a post from 2006. It asked "open solution"
> >> replacement to some random intrusive base class "RWCollectable"
> >> from some random legacy library. It perhaps let the library
> >> to do some sort of serialization.
> >>
> >
> > I'm guessing it was a Rogue Wave library.
>
> Wow, thanks. I had forgotten all about Rogue Wave -- it was
> before my time. Feels good to, for once, have missed something
> because you're too young ...
>
> What's its legacy, by the way?
Typing it to Google reveals that "legacy" is mentioned in URL
of its vendor's online documentation:
http://docs.roguewave.com/legacy-hpp/tlsref/rwcollectable.html
> I'm guessing it was radically
> different in scope and philosophy compared to the STL.
Philosophy (and naming) look Smalltalk-like. May be it was made to
simplify migrating something from Smalltalk to C++. For C++ it
feels too over-engineered and intrusive.
For example to achieve persistence of an array of ints you can
keep them in a "RWBag" as "RWCollectableInt"s.
> Are any of the ideas alive today?
It feels likely that equivalent code in Java or in C# will both
look and perform better than C++ with such classes.